VideoHelp Forum

+ Reply to Thread
Results 1 to 4 of 4
  1. Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2002
    Search Comp PM
    some will know this, some won't,

    1)defrag your hard drive
    2) stop all uneccesary backgroud programs
    3) set tasking priority to high
    4) disable preview (enable it every now and then when you want to check progress)
    5) use multithreading if you have more than 1 processor
    6) frameserve video from avisynth
    7) if not use vdub
    8) instead of noise reduction filter use dynamic field order correctiion filter for vcd/svcd
    9)set motion search for high instead of highest

    all comment and suggestions good or bad are welcomed
    Quote Quote  
  2. Hi Secretagent,

    As everyone knows, using TMPGenc's Noise reduction really increases the encode time by 2x or more, and obviously you knew it and suggested to use Dynamic Field order filter.

    My question is, is this the equivalent of TMPGenc's Noise reduction? Where can I get this filter, I tried searching on AVISynth web site and found nothing...can you possible let me know where can I download it?

    Quote Quote  
  3. Originally Posted by secretagent
    some will know this, some won't,

    6) frameserve video from avisynth
    7) if not use vdub
    haven't used avisynth, but frameserving from vdub adds considerable amount of time...let alone, you can't use the "shut down computer after completed" function, which comes in handy if you don't sit in front of your computer and watch it encode...i've only had to use vdub to frameserve when i needed to add subs using vobsub....i've also used flaskmpeg to frameserve (primarily for subs and also for seamless branching movies like ID4)....that also adds some encode time...

    so far, frameserving through dvd2avi is the fastest for me when compared with vdub and flask.

    also, filters in general slow down the encode time. however, i've personally had to resort to some of them. i.e. the deinterlace filter has come in handy when those interlaced lines appear (yes..even when forced film in dvd2avi on 95+% FILM source). deinterlace filter per se doesn't increase encode time very much because it applies the filter throughout the movie...however, i chose to sacrifice encode time by using the adaptive de-interlace filter, which takes considerably more encode time because the CPU is determining whether a video frame needs to be de-interlaced or that the filter is not applied uniformily throughout the movie. hence, for certain may be a tradeoff b/w encode time and a slight improvement in quality.
    Quote Quote  

Similar Threads